Diagnosing rolling-element bearing faults from vibration is a canonical physical-sensing task and a widely used benchmark for domain adaptation under operating-condition shift.
Accuracies above 99 percent are commonly reported, but under evaluation splits that place the same physical bearing in both training and test.
We revisit the task under a held-out-bearing protocol, assigning every bearing unit entirely to either the training or the test set, and find that source-only transfer is far weaker than such numbers suggest: on a change of shaft speed it reaches only $0.36$, against a target-supervised ceiling of 0.97.
We then study what governs transfer.
Treating computed order tracking, a shaft-angle resampling that places fault frequencies at fixed shaft orders independent of running speed, as a controlled change of representation, we find that a Fourier Neural Operator raises source-only transfer from $0.36$ to $0.61$ on the speed shift, where the fault peaks move, while a convolutional network of matched feature dimension stays near chance in both representations.
The representation also decides whether unsupervised alignment can work: with the same normalized RBF-MMD loss and no target labels, the operator reaches 0.71 in the frequency domain but 0.95 in the order domain, within 0.02 of the target-supervised ceiling and above $0.86$ on every held-out bearing fold.
Once the representation is right, a small label budget adds little.
These results indicate that, for this task, the input representation rather than the alignment method decides whether adaptation helps.
A second dataset, whose held-out units are fault diameters rather than bearings, shows that the same protocol exposes failures that even a target-supervised model cannot avoid.